RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
FOCUS: This Is a Coup d'Etat, Plain and Simple Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=27921"><span class="small">Mort Rosenblum, Reader Supported News</span></a>   
Saturday, 14 January 2017 12:16

Rosenblum writes: "Now it is clear: we are seeing a coup d'etat. And its perpetrators, aided by citizens' apathy and wishful thinking, don't even need to gas up tanks or muzzle the media. This is exactly how democracies die."

Donald Trump. (photo: Bill Clark/RollCall)
Donald Trump. (photo: Bill Clark/RollCall)


This Is a Coup d'Etat, Plain and Simple

By Mort Rosenblum, Reader Supported News

14 January 17

 

ow it is clear: we are seeing a coup d'etat. And its perpetrators, aided by citizens' apathy and wishful thinking, don't even need to gas up tanks or muzzle the media. This is exactly how democracies die.

We can stop this and emerge stronger -- but only if enough of us grasp what is at stake and take action. Put aside political leanings and polemics to spend a moment assessing for yourself what you see unfolding.

Here, for what it's worth, is the view of a reporter who has covered coups in sizeable republics, evil empires and banana backwaters for a very long time.

Donald Trump is our chief executive, a term-limit civil servant bound by laws and common values to serve us all. Congressmen represent entire constituencies, not just partisans within them. Justices swear to be fair-minded and impartial.

One day after a departing president showed us our best side, outlining historic growth after crippling decline and pleading for unity in magnanimous terms that moved many to tears, his successor showed us our worst.

Though trounced by popular vote, Trump acts as if we handed him a crown. That storybook emperor skulked off when a kid pointed out he was naked. Trump simply flips us the finger and commits one indecent act after another.

Even if, against all economic odds, he could cut deals that made Americans richer at the expense of others, is that all matters? Consider the consequences in a volatile world bristling with arms and facing climatic endgame.

Trump's siding with Vladimir Putin rather than our incumbent leader falls between treachery and treason. It defines a man who puts his own ego above all else. With dazzling hypocrisy, his party criticizes him yet takes little action.

Republicans' disregard for propriety - trying to abolish ethics oversight as they steamroll approval of top officials tainted by vested interests, nepotism and crackpot extremism - reveals contempt for a citizenry they presume is stupid.

Already, a mad scramble is on to strip protection from natural splendor that took eons to evolve, sacred Indian sites, endangered aquifers and virgin wilderness for immediate plunder by a rapacious few with no regard for generations to come.

Our failsafe, beyond the three branches, is a permanent Fourth Estate: the press, now the "news media." For all the failings of its worst components, it is vital to us. Its best components set a global standard.

Trump's "press conference" swept away any lingering doubt of demagogic intention. He was an imperious insulting bully who dismissed substance with inane generality, focusing not on domestic or world crises but on his own self-image.

When a reporter asked about his tax returns, he said the American people weren't interested. "I don't think they care at all," he sneered, thrusting a finger at his questioner. "I think you care."

Here is Trump in, well, a nutshell. A free society and its press are inseparable. Point one in our Bill of Rights. A dictator's first move is to discredit news media and replace them big-lie propaganda, which is why Breitbart "News" had a front seat.

Presidential news conferences began as simple briefings: an executive answering to the people who hired him via the press. Now live TV allows leaders to play to the public, bypassing reporters who might pin them down with hard facts.

News executives let George W. Bush choreograph with pre-chosen questioners. Barack Obama imposed draconian means to plug leaks but answered questions when asked. Trump dismisses non-cheerleaders as unruly children.

CNN revealed an open secret, an unsubstantiated but solidly based report that Russians had taped Trump in a honey trap. Big whoop: a businessman who boasts of sexual prowess hired a prostitute. A simple denial would suffice.

But Trump went nuclear. "Fake news!" he thundered at a CNN reporter seeking clarity, cutting him off. Then a question came from Ian Pannell of BBC, a seasoned pro with the most credible, comprehensive global news purveyor I know.

"BBC," Trump said. "That's another beauty."

As for substance, Trump asserted: "(There are) 96 million really wanting a job and they can't get. You know that story - the real number. That's the real number. So that's the way it is."

No, NPR noted in a running fact-check, the real number is 7.5 million. We are at full employment: 4.7 percent. More jobs would spike inflation. Trump included people not in the work force, including students, retirees and stay-at-home parents.

The man is a total fool - or he thinks that the rest of us are.

Meryl Streep brought this down to basic humanity at the Golden Globe Awards. More than a chief executive, she said, a president defines who we are. To illustrate, she chose an image many of us still can't get out of our heads.

Displeased by New York Times' reporter Serge Kovaleski, he mocked a condition that makes the man's bent right arm and hands move uncontrollably. Trump denies it, telling us to believe him rather than our own eyes.

Among so many outrages, some scare me to my core.

Trump approached truth, unintended, in one of his absurd tweets: "Is this Nazi Germany?" He was complaining that the CIA hovered over him. But his Big-Lie demagoguery evokes far too much of a Führer elected by a fearful, hurting nation.

He is an equal-opportunity bigot, not specifically anti-Semitic. His free-form ill-informed extremism, mercurial with no clear worldview, risks eventual conflict with China and Russia. For now, there is the unholy land.

The man named as our ambassador to Israel has said that people like me are no better than Nazi guards who herded Jews to their death. That is, we Jews who believe that a separate Palestine is essential to Israel's survival and global stability.

My name and nose mark me as Jewish, but my religion is honest journalism, a belief that whoever or whatever created this world needs the help of reporters to keep it spinning as planned.

Since 1967, I've seen Holy Land hatreds grow in response to perceived injustice. We can't bomb those away. The terrorism Trump blames on Obama is rooted in our conduct of needless unwinnable war in Iraq.

But reporting loses all meaning if a society disregards fact and documented history. Without a grip on reality, we are lost. We need schools that prepare kids to see the world as it is. Yet Trump gives us Beverly DeVos.

An elitist billionaire, DeVos pushes private charter schools that earn profits while educating a chosen few and condemning others to blackboard jungles that turn out barely literate masses to work cheap and believe what they're told.

Finland, in contrast, has the world's best schools because all of them are public. If rich people want their kids properly educated, they have to raise the level for everyone.

There is so much more; a cabinet of wolves to watch over us sheep; the sham of keeping Trump family business separate from ours; the ignominious rush to disrupt Obamacare for no reason but scorn for the man whose name it bears.

That last is the kicker. Affordable Health Care is flawed because Congress rejected a single-payer approach so big business could profit. Republicans are repealing it before they know what might eventually take its place.

Politicians who insist that the life of unformed fetuses is sacred are prepared to let people die before their time before they can't afford our absurdly high medical costs.

So what to do?

First, think of cockroaches infesting a dark room. When you flip on the light, they scurry for the baseboards. If not, a can of Raid does the trick. That's Congress. Each voter only has to focus on two senators and a representative.

Even in gerrymandered states, voter turnout is low; committed opposition can defeat anyone. Call, write, sign petitions, attend town halls, organize protests and get to know aides who listen to reason. Be polite, persuasive - and persistent.

For a useful plan, go to www.indivisibleguide.com, a report from former congressional staff workers about how Tea Party amateurs inveigled their way onto Capitol Hill.

For a sense of how the cockroach kings put their narrow interests over ours, take a close look at Mitch McConnell, whose latest outrage was to stonewall a moderate Supreme Court nominee for nearly a year. If Trump proposes a partisan justice, compel Congress to stonewall another four years.

Our would-be emperor needs constant watching. More than anything else, he craves adulation. Boycott his brand. Remind his enthusiasts of every broken promise. If he senses the nation's mood harden against him, he will likely respond.

Coup leaders habitually entrench themselves with firepower and mass arrests. They tear up existing laws to write their own. Ours depend only on our apathy and ignorance. If we can't stop them cold, we deserve whatever befalls us.



Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Free Chelsea Manning Now Print
Saturday, 14 January 2017 09:54

Madar writes: "Freedom is suddenly in sight for Chelsea Manning. There is a real chance the Iraq War veteran and WikiLeaks whistleblower could be home by Groundhog's Day."

A supporter of Chelsea Manning in London in 2014. (photo: Gail Orenstein/ZUMA Wire)
A supporter of Chelsea Manning in London in 2014. (photo: Gail Orenstein/ZUMA Wire)


Free Chelsea Manning Now

By Chase Madar, Jacobin

14 January 17

 

President Obama must act now and grant clemency to Chelsea Manning.

reedom is suddenly in sight for Chelsea Manning. There is a real chance the Iraq War veteran and Wikileaks whistleblower could be home by Groundhog’s Day.

Even a year ago it was unthinkable; now, it could be a partial redemption of the Obama administration’s shoddy record of persecuting leaks and whistleblowers.

Chelsea Manning served Army intelligence, the position from which she leaked thousands of field reports from the Afghan and Iraq Wars, as well as thousands of State Department documents, to Wikileaks. Thanks to Manning, we have a mosaic portrait of the flailing Afghan counterinsurgency war: night raids gone wrong, checkpoint shootings of civilians, outposts built and abandoned. We know that it was official US policy, in spite of the highest official denials, for occupying US troops to not intervene in the torture by Iraqi authorities of local suspects. We know that the State Department pushed hard to keep the minimum wage down in Haiti, the poorest nation in the Americas, and worked to extend Big Pharma’s intellectual property regime to Western Europe, where prescription drugs costs a small fraction of what they do here.

Not much of this raw self-knowledge in Manning’s leaks is flattering to our national vanity — which makes it all the more essential we face it. The leaks are routinely cited in mainstream media and in scholarly studies of foreign policy. In a domain where overclassification is extreme beyond belief — not until 2010 did the government declassify one document dating from the James Madison administration, a wait period of two centuries — these leaks were a badly needed beam of light.

Such knowledge is usually unwelcome by those in power, who then attempt to shoot the messenger: whistleblowers get routinely blamed for the problems they uncover. Manning’s shoddy treatment is no exception. But there are three things you should know about her revelations.

First, although officials and media commentators responded to these leaks with varying degrees of panic, prosecutors at Manning’s long court-martial failed to demonstrate any concrete harm from the disclosures to actual soldiers or civilians.

Second, although this is by volume the largest leak in US history, it is still well under 1 percent of what the federal government typically classifies in a year, and the “slippery slope” arguments that this would lead to total transparency in the machinations of American government have proved to be nonsense. Overclassification continues to choke American statecraft and public discourse, hiding crucial information about our government’s actions at home and abroad from the American people.

Third, not a single document released by Manning was classified as “Top Secret,” and many —including the gunsight video of a massacre by US helicopters over a Baghdad suburb in July 2007 — were not classified at all. (Top Secret classification itself means much less than it might seem: a whopping 1.4 million people, not all of them American citizens, hold Top Secret security clearance.)

Defending Manning and her leaks are not just a matter of goody-two-shoes principle but immense real-life consequences. The US invasion of Iraq was simply not possible but for government secrecy, distortion and lies. The architects of that dishonest war have escaped the slightest punishment, yet an on-the-ground private who tried to share her knowledge of that bloodbath is the one being severely punished.

If you’re the kind of person who thinks it is sinful and wicked to know what your government is doing, by all means, take a pass on this plea for clemency. But if you can see the dystopian levels of Washington’s state secrecy have done too much damage to the world, now is the time to take five minutes to raise a voice for Chelsea Manning.

This is a rare instance when a massive public response will make a very real difference. The Department of Justice is incredibly tight-lipped about its clemency process, and their surprise leak to NBC News yesterday that Manning is on a “short list” for clemency was almost certainly a trial balloon to gauge public reaction to a case that until recently was too hot for the White House to touch.

Not anymore. Support for Chelsea Manning has been building steadily, and in some truly unlikely places.

Start with the orthodox hawks who edit the Brookings Institutions’ influential Lawfare blog. Last October they called for Manning’s sentence to be commuted, a plea reiterated this past week.

On the populist right there is surging support for Manning as well. One strange side-effect of Julian Assange becoming the darling of InfoWars and Fox News is that all of a sudden many Trump-loving “deplorables” have taken on the cause of this transgender Iraq War vet. (It’s hard to imagine Trump granting clemency to Manning, but not quite unimaginable — after all, it was conservative Republican Warren Harding who pardoned socialist Eugene Debs as part of a blanket amnesty on Christmas Day in 1921.)

And it would be remiss not to mention the sympathetic coverage of Manning that has appeared in Cosmopolitan magazine, focusing on Manning’s gender transition, announced the day after her sentencing of a brutal 35 years in prison. Manning’s struggle for the dignity of transgender military prisoners, accomplished with the expert advocacy of the ACLU lawyer Chase Strangio, has brought in LGBT support for this national security whistleblower as well.

True, there will be some upset stomachs from neocon law-and-order types, but the currency of their fear-mongering is worth a lot less in 2017. As for the liberal hawks who have often been Manning’s nastiest persecutors, they are at present too occupied with finding Putin puppets under every sofa cushion to raise much of a fuss. They’ll deal.

Although Manning’s offense is unique, by American standards, the brutal punishment she has received —nearly a year of pretrial isolation confinement against the express medical advice of military prison authorities and an extreme 35-year sentence — is not. There are between 70,000 and 100,000 American prisoners doing some form of long-term solitary, a practice that is rightly seen as torture. Long-term solitary is a routine feature of the American penal landscape and it needs to be abolished.

Nor of course is Manning the only prisoner deserving clemency. Two federal prisoners I’ve had the pleasure of talking with, Alice Marie Johnson and Euka Wadlington, both doing life without parole for nonviolent drug offenses — life without parole for nonviolent drug offenses! — just had their petitions denied, probably because the DOJ decided to let their prosecutors weigh in on the decision. The Obama DOJ has granted a record number of commutations as well as denied a record number of clemency petitions, as P. S. Ruckman’s excellent “Pardon Power” blog has pointed out.

Clemency at the federal level and in most states remains miserly, and Attorney General Loretta Lynch did not distinguish herself when she recently and erroneously claimed that it is beyond the federal government’s power to issue blanket amnesties. In fact, presidents from Lincoln to Wilson to Carter have all granted clemency to entire categories of people, and it is time that our governors and presidents reacquired this habit.

But the postmodern medievalism of US criminal justice is not any kind of reason to deny Chelsea Manning or anyone else clemency. And as disoriented as this country is with the waking-nightmare prospect of “President Trump,” it is now time to demand clemency for this courageous whistleblower. All it takes is shedding off a little apathy on our part. “Apathy,” Manning once wrote in an online conversation with the federal informant who then turned her in, “is far worse than the active participation [in the Iraq War]… apathy is its own 3rd dimension.” (These chatlogs by the way are the most gripping and profound work of nonfiction theater that our century has yet produced.)

Freedom is what she deserves. Our dystopian levels of state secrecy have directly led to the carnage in the Middle East whose consequences are still unwinding. Whistleblowers like her should be welcomed, not brutalized. So free her, President Obama, while you still can. Free Chelsea Manning.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Five Ways Trump's "News Conference" Wasn't a News Conference Print
Friday, 13 January 2017 15:45

Reich writes: "Tyrants don't allow open questioning, and they hate the free press. They want total control. That's why Trump's so-called 'news conference' - the first he's held in six months - wasn't really a news conference at all."

Robert Reich. (photo: Getty)
Robert Reich. (photo: Getty)


Five Ways Trump's "News Conference" Wasn't a News Conference

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog

13 January 17

 

yrants don’t allow open questioning, and they hate the free press. They want total control. That’s why Trump’s so-called “news conference” on December 11 – the first he’s held in six months – wasn’t really a news conference at all. 

Consider:

1. Trump refused to answer questions from reporters who have run stories he doesn’t like, or from news outlets that have criticized him. This is a blatant attempt to control the news media by making them reluctant to run negatives stories about Trump for fear they’ll be frozen out. 

2. He loaded the audience with paid staffers who cheered his statements and jeered at reporters. Never before has a president-elect or president held a news conference larded with paid staffers, designed to give the impression that the media are divided between those who support him and those who criticize him. 

3. He continued calling the media “dishonest.” This is part of Trump’s continuing effort to discredit the press and to reduce public confidence in it. 

4. He condemned individual news outlets. Trump criticized CNN for dispensing “fake news,” called Buzzfeed “a pile of garbage,” and sarcastically called the BBC “another beauty.”

5. He repeatedly lied, and the media in attendance weren’t allowed to question him on his lies. A sampling of Trump lies from his “news conference”:

(1) “It’s very familiar territory, news conferences, because we used to give them on an almost daily basis.” Wrong. His last news conference was July 27.

(2) Trump claimed credit for Chrysler and Ford announcing more production in the U.S. Wrong. Sergio Marchionne, the Fiat Chrysler chief executive, said Chrysler’s plan had been in the works for more than a year and had nothing to do with Trump. Marchionne credited the decision to talks with the United Auto Workers. 

Analysts say Ford’s decision to expand in Michigan rather than in Mexico had mostly to do with the company’s long-term plans to invest in electric vehicles. It’s easier for companies to find highly skilled workers to build new products, such as electric cars, in the United States than in Mexico.

(3) “When we lost 22 million names and everything else that was hacked recently, [the press] didn’t make a big deal out of that.” Wrong. The Chinese hack of 22 million accounts at the Office of Personnel Management was front-page news.

(4) “The Democratic National Committee was totally open to be hacked. They did a very poor job. … And they tried to hack the Republican National Committee, and they were unable to break through.” Wrong. FBI Director James B. Comey said there was evidence that Republican National Committee domains were also targeted but none of the information that may have been obtained was leaked. Comey said that the Russians “got far deeper and wider into the [DNC] than the RNC,” adding that “similar techniques were used in both cases.”

(5) I have no deals that could happen in Russia, because we’ve stayed away. And I have no loans with Russia.” Wrong. Trump repeatedly sought deals in Russia. In a 2008 speech, Donald Trump Jr. said “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets,” and “we see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”

In short, Trump’s first news conference as president-elect – his first news conference in six months – wasn’t a “news conference” at all, and shouldn’t be called one. 

It’s another example of Trump’s attempt to control the media. Trump isn’t even president yet, but he’s already eroding our democracy. 

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Intelligence Community Isn't Intimidated by Trump Print
Friday, 13 January 2017 12:32

Hayden writes: "The relationship between the incoming Trump administration and the American intelligence community is playing out like one of those 1950s Saturday matinee serials - 'Lost Planet,' 'Commando Cody' and the like - where we are left perilously on the edge of our seat at the end of every episode."

Former CIA head Michael Hayden at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee on May 18, 2006. (photo: Joe Marquette/Bloomberg)
Former CIA head Michael Hayden at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee on May 18, 2006. (photo: Joe Marquette/Bloomberg)


Intelligence Community Isn't Intimidated by Trump

By Michael Hayden, The Hill

13 January 17

 

he relationship between the incoming Trump administration and the American intelligence community is playing out like one of those 1950s Saturday matinee serials — “Lost Planet,” “Commando Cody” and the like — where we are left perilously on the edge of our seat at the end of every episode.

To play it back, this week's episode began with this 140-character beauty:

Note the near sneering quotation marks around intelligence and the smothering of culpability for the hacks by prefacing Russian involvement with "so-called."

Then there was the (untrue) ploy that the meeting had been moved because intelligence officials weren't ready.

The president-elect followed this up a day later by suggesting that he had sought a second opinion:

The relationship between the incoming Trump administration and the American intelligence community is playing out like one of those 1950s Saturday matinee serials — “Lost Planet,” “Commando Cody” and the like — where we are left perilously on the edge of our seat at the end of every episode.

To play it back, this week's episode began with this 140-character beauty:

Note the near sneering quotation marks around intelligence and the smothering of culpability for the hacks by prefacing Russian involvement with "so-called."

Then there was the (untrue) ploy that the meeting had been moved because intelligence officials weren't ready.

The president-elect followed this up a day later by suggesting that he had sought a second opinion:

Now, to be accurate, Assange's actual response to the question posed to him by Trump acolyte Sean Hannity — "Our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party” — was narrowly crafted, and hardly the categorical denial advertised in the tweet. Besides, Assange is a known liar, and how would he know the ultimate provenance of the emails, anyway?

So why create an apparent equivalency between his views and those of the American intelligence community? "Here you go, America. Two choices. Pick one."

And all of that is on top of the transition team's original response to the intelligence community's Russia hacking charge: "These are the same people who said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction,"they said, citing a signal failure of the community 14 years ago.

In a way, this reminds me of trash talk, the way it is used by an athlete to intimidate an opponent. Think of an NFL cornerback who knows he's going to be thrown at a lot come Sunday trying to get into the head of his opponent. We've seen the president-elect use this as a candidate, with his ad hominem put-downs of Little Marco, Lyin' Ted, Crooked Hillary and "the dishonest media."

But it's quite another thing to adopt a (successful) campaign tool and use it as a mode of governance, especially with your own intelligence community. It does help explain, though, the president-elect’s keeping intelligence off balance with zingers like this on New Year's Eve, "And I also know things that other people don't know, and so they cannot be sure of the situation."

I know of no other historical example of this, at least on this scale. It may be that the president-elect can't help himself, that this is the only technique he knows when faced with unpleasant information, and that we shouldn't read much more into it than that.

The relationship between the incoming Trump administration and the American intelligence community is playing out like one of those 1950s Saturday matinee serials — “Lost Planet,” “Commando Cody” and the like — where we are left perilously on the edge of our seat at the end of every episode.

To play it back, this week's episode began with this 140-character beauty:

Note the near sneering quotation marks around intelligence and the smothering of culpability for the hacks by prefacing Russian involvement with "so-called."

Then there was the (untrue) ploy that the meeting had been moved because intelligence officials weren't ready.

The president-elect followed this up a day later by suggesting that he had sought a second opinion:

Now, to be accurate, Assange's actual response to the question posed to him by Trump acolyte Sean Hannity — "Our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party” — was narrowly crafted, and hardly the categorical denial advertised in the tweet. Besides, Assange is a known liar, and how would he know the ultimate provenance of the emails, anyway?

So why create an apparent equivalency between his views and those of the American intelligence community? "Here you go, America. Two choices. Pick one."

And all of that is on top of the transition team's original response to the intelligence community's Russia hacking charge: "These are the same people who said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction,"they said, citing a signal failure of the community 14 years ago.

In a way, this reminds me of trash talk, the way it is used by an athlete to intimidate an opponent. Think of an NFL cornerback who knows he's going to be thrown at a lot come Sunday trying to get into the head of his opponent. We've seen the president-elect use this as a candidate, with his ad hominem put-downs of Little Marco, Lyin' Ted, Crooked Hillary and "the dishonest media."

But it's quite another thing to adopt a (successful) campaign tool and use it as a mode of governance, especially with your own intelligence community. It does help explain, though, the president-elect’s keeping intelligence off balance with zingers like this on New Year's Eve, "And I also know things that other people don't know, and so they cannot be sure of the situation."

I know of no other historical example of this, at least on this scale. It may be that the president-elect can't help himself, that this is the only technique he knows when faced with unpleasant information, and that we shouldn't read much more into it than that.

In any event, the intelligence folks didn't seem to be intimidated. They briefed the president-elect and his team last Friday, saying they had high confidence that the Russians had hacked American political entities, planted the stolen data in selected websites, worked to punish and cripple Hillary Clinton and then came to favor the election of Donald Trump.

A public report was issued with identical conclusions, but with a thin evidentiary stack under each of them. Even though a disappointing level of proof was made public, it seems that the data in the actual classified briefing was strong enough. Team Trump, despite the earlier taunting, didn't challenge the data.

Instead, it pivoted. The team transformed the issue to a generalized "cyber thing", emphasizing that "Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our government institutions, businesses and organizations."

All of which is true and important, of course, but the point of the briefing was less "we got a cyber problem" than "we really got a Russia problem."

And that aspect went noticeably unremarked on by anyone in Trump Tower. In fact, Trump’s aides falsely claimed on the weekend talk shows that the intelligence briefers had confirmed that the Russians had failed to influence the outcome of the election, a conclusion that the intelligence chiefs explicitly avoided as being beyond the purpose and means of their craft.

So, as this episode of the ongoing serial ends, we are (per the genre) once again in peril, wondering if, when and how the incoming team will process the kind of unwelcome information that intelligence will routinely present it.

As the credits start to roll and the suspense builds, we are learning that the president-elect appears unmoved on the subject. With no reference to what he may or may not have heard the day before, he tweeted on Saturday that, "Only stupid people, or fools, would think that it [a good relationship with Russia] is bad."

A tweet, a taunt and an unmoved policy, all in one.

Then Wednesday, angered by the publication of some vile (and unproven) opposition research that has been rattling around Washington for weeks, the president-elect blamed his intelligence community and seemed to say that it was Nazi-like.

As a kid I couldn't wait for the next episode.

Maybe not this time, though. This may be one serial that doesn't have a happy ending.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Donald Trump, Russia, and the Political 'Witch Hunt' That Isn't Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=6853"><span class="small">Frank Rich, New York Magazine</span></a>   
Friday, 13 January 2017 11:45

Rich writes: "Let's not pretend we don't know what is happening here. There is evidence that Donald Trump and his administration-in-formation are partially, perhaps wholly, beholden to the Kremlin and/or those Russian oligarchs in its thrall."

Donald Trump. (photo: Spencer Platt/Getty)
Donald Trump. (photo: Spencer Platt/Getty)


Donald Trump, Russia, and the Political 'Witch Hunt' That Isn't

By Frank Rich, New York Magazine

13 January 17

 

Most weeks, New York Magazine writer-at-large Frank Rich speaks with contributor Alex Carp about the biggest stories in politics and culture. Today: Trump’s press conference, BuzzFeed, and Bill O’Reilly’s settlement.

ear the end of Donald Trump’s press conference yesterday, Trump was asked if he could “stand here today, once and for all, and say that no one connected to him or his campaign “had any contact with Russia leading up to or during the presidential campaign.” He tried to avoid the question at the podium, and the press chased him to ask again at the elevator. Is this a sign that Trump’s Russia evasions and broad denials will eventually run out of steam?

Let’s not pretend we don’t know what is happening here. There is evidence that Donald Trump and his administration-in-formation are partially, perhaps wholly, beholden to the Kremlin and/or those Russian oligarchs in its thrall. This is why Trump refused to answer that question about contacts with Russia during the campaign — and why he’ll lie about it when he finally feels he must muster some kind of answer. His symbiosis with Russia is also why he will never release his tax returns, for what other reason could there be at this point except that they reveal the Russian financial ties he denies? After all, we already know the other embarrassments contained in those returns — that he hasn’t paid taxes for years, that he practices no actual philanthropy, and that his businesses are in a perennial waltz with bankruptcy, fraud, and failure.

No, Russia is the big story here. The elephant in the room is a bear. Trump has made no bones about repeatedly hiring fellow Putin sycophants, whether his former campaign chief Paul Manafort, the incoming National Security Adviser, Mike Flynn, or the secretary of State nominee, Rex Tillerson. When the heroic aviator Charles Lindbergh was awarded a medal, the Service Cross of the German Eagle, by Hermann Goering “by order of der Führer” before World War II, it helped make him persona non grata in the FDR White House. When Tillerson received a Russian Order of Friendship Award from Putin, Trump regarded it as an incentive to hire him.

How this will play out once Trump is inaugurated is impossible to fathom. We have a president-elect who trusts Putin and Julian Assange more than he does America’s intelligence agencies, whom he has compared to the Nazis. Perhaps Trump’s only real goal is to grab money from deep Russian pockets as fast as he can in opaque business deals managed by his sons while he’s in office. Even so, it’s entirely possible that he and Flynn will help facilitate Putin’s own political aims in exchange — all the while claiming that their motive is merely to band with Russia in “fighting ISIS.” What’s clear is that we are not going to get straight answers to any Russian questions. Even before Trump took over the lectern at his Wednesday press conference, his press spokesman, Sean Spicer, unleashed a preemptive lie about still another Trump-Kremlin connection by claiming that Trump “does not know” Carter Page, an investment banker who was investigated by the F.B.I. last summer for suspicions of private dealings with Russian leaders. In fact, Page had been announced as a Trump foreign-policy adviser by his campaign last year and had been cited by name by Trump himself in an interview with the Washington Post editorial board in March. Both Page and Trump, by the way, have used the term “witch hunt” to describe any attempts to investigate their Russian dealings — the same term used by the Kremlin to fend off evidence that Putin manipulated the American election. Perhaps Page and Trump have the same Kremlin handler, whether or not it is the former KGB agent Putin himself.

Just minutes after CNN reported that intelligence agencies had briefed Trump and President Obama about compromising financial and personal information Russia may hold about the president-elect, BuzzFeed posted a dossier containing the unconfirmed details. BuzzFeed says their dossier is “how we see the job of reporters in 2017”; CNN’s Jake Tapper says it is “irresponsible” and “hurts us all.” Did BuzzFeed make the right call?

Next to the staggering list of press failures that have marked Trump’s rise to the presidency, this seems small potatoes. BuzzFeed did frame what it published as being both unconfirmed and redolent with errors. The “dossier” may well prove to be utter trash (if entertaining trash), and the only slender justification for publishing it is that it fleshes out a true news break by CNN, that both Obama and Trump had been told of this salacious report’s existence by American intelligence agencies, who also have not verified it. But is BuzzFeed’s sin worse than CNN having put Trump henchman Corey Lewandowski on its election-year payroll? Or than the Times repeatedly giving major home-page play to data suggesting that Hillary Clinton had a close to 100 percent chance of victory right up to Election Day? You could argue that that latter stunt actually suppressed Democratic turnout in the presidential race; the BuzzFeed stunt changed nothing unless you count the impressive number of jokes it has prompted, on Twitter and beyond, around the phenomenon of #GoldenShower. It is not a bright spot in BuzzFeed’s history, but the ruckus it has generated seems disproportionate, a reflection of how much Trump has put the press on the defensive over a bruising 18 months.

What most seems to upset press critics about BuzzFeed’s action —understandably — is that Trump seized on it to paint the entire press Establishment, including CNN, as purveyors of “fake news.” That is an outrage, but if Trump hadn’t found this pretext, he would have found another opening soon enough. There is, of course, no bigger purveyor of fake news than Trump himself, unless it’s his comrade in alt-right propaganda, Stephen Bannon. Trump’s entire campaign was spawned by trafficking in conspiracy theories, whether about President Obama or Mexican immigrants or imaginary Muslims cheering 9/11 in New Jersey. His effort to play the virtuous defender of journalistic ethics is as ludicrous as his presenting himself as the greatest, most respectful champion of America’s women. He is determined to bully, destabilize, and discredit the press. But those who buy his preposterous self-righteous pose are so imprisoned by the alternative reality of Trump anyway that they might as well be Scientologists — nothing short of an intervention will return them to the real world. These are the same people who think that Trump’s display of piles of manila envelopes at his press conference actually told us something about his business ethics. If I may briefly embrace Trumpism by being both vulgar and politically incorrect, let me say that people who fall for his bullshit are idiots. Even if the dossier BuzzFeed published is found to be mostly true, they’ll still believe it’s fake news because it doesn’t match the fake news they are imbibing every day.

It’s now come out that, soon after Fox News ousted chairman Roger Ailes, declaring that his behavior would not be tolerated, the network also settled with an employee making similar sexual-harassment complaints against Bill O’Reilly. Why do you think O’Reilly was able to remain at the network?

As my colleague Gabriel Sherman has reported, Fox News is now officially all in on Trump, as certified by Rupert Murdoch’s decision to promote the Trump-friendly Tucker Carlson to the Trump skeptic Megyn Kelly’s vacated prime-time slot. A network allied with the president-elect who gave America “grab ’em by the pussy” and that tolerated Ailes’s predatory sexual behavior for years is certainly going to stand by its highest-rated on-camera personality even if he is a repeat sexual offender. Let’s just be grateful that neither BuzzFeed nor anyone else has yet obtained audio tapes of O’Reilly masturbating while on the phone with his female prey, a particularly gross element in the Times’ account of the latest incident. Then again, in the Trump era, it’s safe to say that just as Trump could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and not lose any of his followers, so O’Reilly could be found masturbating outside the Fox News studio on Sixth Avenue and not lose the confidence of either his viewers or the Murdochs.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1768 1769 1770 Next > End >>

Page 1765 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN